India rebukes Pakistan’s attempts to internationalize Jammu and Kashmir

India tore apart Pakistan’s attempt to smear India by again referring to the Jammu Kashmir issue at the UN forum in a bid to internationalize the entire issue.

Indian delegate, diplomat Ms. Bhavika Mangalanandan did not mince her words when she said that Jammu and Kashmir was an “integral and inalienable” part of India.

She expressed shock at Pakistan’s “boldness” and questioned Pakistan’s right to speak out against India, the world’s “largest democracy”.

She showed Pakistan a mirror and downplayed its reputation as a country “ruled by the military” and with a “global reputation for terrorism, drug trafficking and transnational crime.”

For a country like Pakistan to talk about violence anywhere was “hypocrisy at its worst,” she said.

Her response came after Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sherif drew a parallel between Palestine and Jammu and Kashmir in his earlier speech.

He had said, “Like the people of Palestine, the people of Jammu and Kashmir have also fought for their freedom and right to self-determination for a century.”

He stated that over the years, Pakistan has supported the commitment of the Father of Pakistan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah 1947, that Pakistan will adhere to the UN Charter and make its full contribution to the peace and prosperity of the world.

How hollow does this promise ring today when we look at it in the light of three wars with India since Independence and continued cross-border terrorism as an instrument of state policy against India.

Instead of starting a full-fledged war with India, Pakistan prefers to be a constant annoyance indulging in cross-border terrorism.

Bhavika Mangalanandan also mentioned Pakistan’s involvement in the attack on the Parliament of India and also the financial capital of India – Mumbai, as well as market places and pilgrimage routes.

She stated that Pakistan has long used cross-border terrorism as a weapon against its neighbors.

She took a strong stand and firmly warned Pakistan: “Terrorism against India will bring consequences”

Thus, with her fiery speech, she effectively destroyed the ‘holier than thou’ attitude of the Pakistani Prime Minister, who spoke of Jammu and Kashmir being “occupied” by the large Indian military presence. He painted a gloomy picture of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir under the Indian army.

He spoke at length about the “genocidal” war in Israel and said the world cannot sit still on this issue and do anything more than condemn.

He spoke of the pain and fear of the people of Gaza and the blood and sacrifice of innocent Palestinians.

What is shocking is that while speaking about the dire plight of the Palestinians and pushing for Palestine to be admitted as a full member of the United Nations, he equated what the Palestinians were suffering and their demands with those of the people of Jammu and Kashmir .

It is clear that Pakistan did not miss the opportunity to raise the old issue of plebiscite in Kashmir, on which the UN had also passed a resolution long ago.

India gave its response as part of its right to respond, but what is interesting to note is that this whole give and take between India and Pakistan and raising the issue has almost become a kind of ritual at almost all meetings of the UN General Assembly.

Whenever Pakistan tries to influence world opinion on Jammu and Kashmir, it talks about the large military presence there as a virtual occupation, which brings up the point that the UN resolution of a plebiscite on J&K has not been implemented to this day has been carried out.

Whenever Pakistan refers to this issue in its Right to Reply, India refutes it with its firm stand that there was no question of abandoning Kashmir, which like any other part was an integral and important part of India.

World leaders, gathered at the United Nations General Assembly, have been listening to both sides and their individual positions for decades. Both sides are given the opportunity to present their views and that is where the matter ends at the United Nations.

India’s position has always been that J&K had become part of India after Maharaja Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir signed the accession agreement.

It had always bothered Pakistan that the border state of J&K, with a large Muslim population, was aligned with India and not Pakistan, and it had always tried to create trouble there.

Regarding the presence of a large number of armed forces in J&K. Being a border state and Pakistan-sponsored terrorist activities continuing, India has legitimate reasons to have sufficient military presence there to protect its interests against any nefarious intentions by Pakistan.

Moreover, India had now also scrapped J&K’s special status under Article 370 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act 2019, creating separate Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and the Union Territory of Ladakh. This has brought Jammu and Kashmir into the mainstream of India, just like any other part.

India has always insisted that the people of Jammu and Kashmir, who have the same rights as citizens of any other state, should express their aspirations within India’s constitutional provisions and processes.

Now that democracy is flourishing in Jammu and Kashmir and democratic processes are slowly becoming entrenched, the naysayers no longer have much to say.